901 SA NO. 256 OF 1989.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 901 SECOND APPEAL NO. 256 OF 1989 Shahjirao Bhavanrao Pawar VERSUS Shankar Limbaji Wadkar And Others ... Mr. Potdar Eklavya Sandesh, Advocate for Appellant Mr. M. L Dharashive, Advocate for Respondent Nos.2(1) To 2(4), 4(1), 4(2), 6(1) And 6(2), Mr. R. P. Bhumkar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3-1(a) And 3(2) To 3(4) WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11537 OF 2023 IN SA/256/1989 …. CORAM : SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 30.09.2026 PER COURT :- CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11537 OF 2023 1. Heard learned Advocates for both sides. 2. This is an application for condonation of 10,672, 8,676, 8,183, 7,183, 4,305, 4,255, 2,240, 4,479 and 4,507 days delay caused in filing the Civil Application for bringing the legal representatives of deceased Respondent Nos.1, 1(3), 1(4), 2(2), 3, 3(1), 3(2), 4 and 6 on record as well as for setting aside abatement and permission to bring the L.Rs. of deceased Respondents on record. 1 of 4 (( 2 )) 901 SA NO. 256 OF 1989 3. Learned Advocates appearing for the respondents strongly opposed the application and submitted that the delay has not been properly explained and that there are no sufficient reasons to condone the delay as contemplated under Section 5 of the Limitation Act. They prayed to reject the Application. 4. Perused the application. Considering the reasons stated therein and the fact that the Applicants seek to bring the legal representatives of the deceased Respondent Nos.1, 1(3), 1(4), 2(2), 3, 3(1), 3(2), 4 and 6 on record so as to enable this Court to decide the lis finally on merits, the delay deserves to be condoned as it is not deliberately caused. It is well settled that, while considering an application for setting aside abatement, the Courts are required to adopt a liberal approach, as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Perumon Bhagvathy Devaswom v. Bhargavi Amma (Dead) by LRs., (2008) 8 SCC 321. Further considering the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag Vs. Katiji, 1987 AIR (SC) 1353, in which it is held that expression “sufficient cause” under Section 5 of the Limitation Act 1963, is required to be construed liberally and in a manner that enables the Court to advance substantial justice by 2 of 4 (( 3 )) 901 SA NO. 256 OF 1989 deciding matters on merits. The Court further held that the expression “every day’s delay must be explained” does not warrant a pedantic approach and that the principles of limitation should be applied in a rational, common-sense and pragmatic manner. Where substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. 5. In view of the facts and circumstances of the present case, the application deserves to be allowed in the interest of justice. However, considering the fact that there is a huge delay of 10,672, 8,676, 8,183, 7,183, 4,305, 4,255, 2,240, 4,479 and 4,507 days, it would be proper to impose costs upon the appellant. Accordingly, the appellant is directed to deposit costs of Rs.10,000/- with the High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Aurangabad, on or before 07.10.2026. Hence, the following order: ::ORDER:: a. The application is allowed, subject to the deposit of costs of Rs.10,000/- with the office of the High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Aurangabad on or before 07.10.2026. b. The delay of 10,672, 8,676, 8,183, 7,183, 4,305, 4,255, 2,240, 4,479 and 4,507 days caused in 3 of 4 (( 4 )) 901 SA NO. 256 OF 1989 filing the Civil Application for bringing the legal representatives of deceased Respondent Nos.1, 1(3), 1(4), 2(2), 3, 3(1), 3(2), 4 and 6 on record is condoned. c. The abatement is set aside. d. Permission to bring the legal representatives of of deceased Respondents on record is granted. The amendment be carried out within a period of two weeks from today after depositing the costs. If the costs is not deposited within the stipulated period, the application shall be deemed to be rejected without further reference to the Court. . List the matters on 07.10.2026 for taking further steps. Learned Advocates for both sides are directed to argue the appeal finally on the next date. [ SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ] HRJadhav 4 of 4